Kapitalizm: Russia’s Struggle to Free Its Economy

Contrary to the situation prevailing in most of Europe and North America, Brazilian economics can be justly described as pluralist, an outcome frequently ascribed to the role played by the Brazilian economics association (ANPEC) as conflict mediator. A crucial episode took place in the early 1970s, when ANPEC chose to welcome the filiation of the heterodox program at the University of Campinas (Unicamp) against threats of withdrawal from one of its most prestigious members, the Getúlio Vargas Foundation. After characterizing the nature of pluralism in current Brazilian economics, the article uncovers the process that led ANPEC to adopt a “pluralist” attitude, and how this related to the Brazilian political context from the 1970s. The outcome was significantly influenced by the actions of other institutions involved in Brazilian economics at the time, notably the Ford Foundation and the team of Vanderbilt University economists working in Brazil under a USAID contract. Choices made within a delicate political context opened the door to the institutionalization of theoretical plurality as a stable feature of the scholarly community of Brazilian economists.     

Measurement,incentives and constraintsin Stigler's economics of science *

Abstract

George J. Stigler's seminal role as one of the founders of the economics of science is summarized and evaluated. His main contribution rests in his asking an array of important questions and arguing persuasively for the application of empirical, and especially statistical, techniques to the answering of those questions. He asks whether and how science progresses; whether a scientist's biography is important in understanding his science; what characteristics of a scientist are most complementary to success in science; and how the professionalization of science redirects the attention of scientists more toward internal puzzle-solving, and less toward applied relevance.     

What's in a frame? Social organization,risk perception and the sociology of knowledge

A central problem in the sociology of knowledge has been to show that sane people can intelligibly have quite different alternative understandings of the same problem, such as a kind of risk, without abandoning the idea that there is a real problem about which to disagree, and to show the social basis of both plurality and viability. In recent decades, attempts to make this problem tractable have focused on the idea of a ‘frame’. Theories of frames offer accounts of the range of content, as distinguished from theories of processes of diffusion, of which risk amplification theory is the best known example. In this article, several theories of frames – those of Goffman, D'Andrade, Moscovici, Gamson, Schön and Rein, and of prospect theory – found are to be inadequate, because of their lack of clarity and plausibility in their answers to four key questions: ‘what is the relationship between sense‐making and bias?’, ‘how are frames to be individuated?’, ‘where do frames come from?’, and ‘how far and how can people move between frames?’. The article makes the case for a neo‐Durkheimian institutional theory developed by Douglas and others. This approach derives frames as concrete applications to specific contexts from thought styles, which are in turn the product of solidarities or institutional styles of social organization, because it can offer clear, testable, parsimonious hypotheses with which to answer these four questions. The theory therefore provides an account of the institutional logic of framing, and presents reasons for preferring this to non‐institutional approaches such as the various kinds of cognitivism. The article offers three conceptual innovations with which to develop the neo‐Durkheimian theory, in order better to deal with the crucial fourth question about the scope for mobility between frames. These innovations and some specific hypotheses about the scope for mobility between frames are supported by consideration of some exploratory qualitative empirical research on privacy risk perception. The theory provides a more satisfactory strategy for tackling the core problem than most others, by showing plurality to be limited, by showing clear and specific social bases for plurality of frames, by neither wholly endorsing nor wholly rejecting any basic bias, and by showing that their conflictual and systemic interdependence is what makes for viability.     

The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail: myths of scientific racism and the pursuit of excellence in sport†

Despite the continuing publication of research that suggests there is no scientific basis to ‘race’ as a biological category, theories of racial difference continue to be invoked within sport to explain the perceived dominance of black athletes. In the case of John Entine’s controversial ‘Taboo: why black athletes dominate sports and why we are afraid to talk about it’ or undergraduate textbooks that suggest ‘racial differences’ in physique may significantly affect athletic performance, scientific racism is normalised in sport. In this article, the relationship between scientific racism and sport will be examined. Qualitative research with current sport scientists is used to investigate the socio‐ethical tensions within the subject field of sport science between professionalism, scientism and the demand from external interests to produce results that help people in sport win medals. It will be shown that these tensions, combined with the history of race as a category in sport science, combine to create the discourse of scientific knowledge that reflects, rather than challenges, folk genetics of black athletic physicality.     

‘Time-out’ with the family: the shaping of family leisure in the new urban consumption spaces of cafes,bars and restaurants

In many north-western European countries, the family practices of drinking and eating used to be largely located in the private domain of the home. This situation has recently begun to change, particularly in gentrified urban areas where middle-class families are growing in number and family outings in bars and restaurants are becoming more widespread. This paper examines the new practices of family consumption from two perspectives: the providers and the consumers. Entrepreneurs shape family-friendly spaces by reducing boundaries between eating, drinking and playing and by offering out-of-home pleasures in home-like environments for both parents and children. They balance between accommodating the families and retaining their childless clients. Families that consume in the food and drink spaces are primarily local middle-class families, and fathers and mothers equally participate. This study further reveals that leisure time spent with the family cannot always be classified as leisure time as a family. Parental involvement with the children differs. We distinguish leisured caring time with high parental involvement, own leisure time mainly directed at parents’ personal activities and social leisure time mainly directed at maintaining social relationships beyond the family. We discuss earlier research on the complicated character of family leisure related to the caring duties of parents. Empirical evidence comes from an exploratory study of ten consumption spaces in the inner city of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.     

西方经济学范式的转换和发展———从经济学方法论的视角分析

文章从经济学方法论的视角研究西方经济学的范式及其转换。首先阐述了经济学范式的内涵,接着阐明了经济学范式革命的实质就是范式转换,以及范式转换的多样化表现形式。在此基础上,分别详述了范式演进、范式综合、范式偏离、范式复归、范式交融和范式变异的例证及其各自的特点,从而通过剖析经济学范式的转换揭示西方经济学演变和发展的轨迹。     

当代中国法学的流派化志趣（下）

法学流派的涌现是中国法律学人的夙愿。虽经中国法学者的多方呼吁,但法学流派的“建构”依然步履蹒跚。从对中国法学流派划分诸种观点的评析中,可以说明流派化意识是形成法学流派的重要因素。法学流派像其他任何流派的形成一样是一个自然的过程。法学研究的对象及范围、哲学基础、方法论运用、理论体系的创新等是流派形成的主要因素。当下,法学中国化是中国法学发展的方向。这就意味着中国法学应解决中国问题,法学流派的建构也不能离开这一主题。中国还没有形成具有特色的法学流派。但我们相信,在不久的将来肯定会出现具有自主“知识产权”的、能反映中国人对世界法学做出独特奉献的法学流派。这也是对法学向何处去的一种回应。     

社会学视野下保险业的科学发展

保险业的各类活动是根植在大量的社会结构和社会关系之中,保险的发展是与社会各种制度变迁的交织中实现的,目前针对于商业保险的研究还局限在纯经济学、金融学的分析范式中,本文跳出既有的研究视角,把保险看作是社会的一个组成部分,运用社会学理论体系研究我国商业保险的科学发展,讨论社会制度、社会变迁、文化与意识形态等社会因素与保险发展的相互作用,剖析保险业改革发展的现实条件和路径选择,提出了嵌入于整个社会发展的保险研究的框架思考。在社会学的视野下研究商业保险,有利于提升保险理论的系统性科学性,有利于实现保险与经济社会发展的良性互动。